Courts on AI / Fabricated or misquoted citations

Tlingit Haida Tribal Business Corporation v. OnePromom, LLC

United States District Court for the District of Colorado · Federal district courts · CO · 2026-06-09 · No. 1:25-cv-03285 · order

Fabricated or misquoted citations Competence, fees and billingEve Legal

On 2026-06-09, in Tlingit Haida Tribal Business Corporation v. OnePromom, the District of Colorado ordered plaintiff to show cause why the filing was not sanctionable and whether counsel complied with professional obligations. Counsel filed a motion using quotations that did not appear in the cited source.

Disposition: The court denied in part and granted in part dismissal-related relief and ordered defense counsel to show cause why she should not be sanctioned under Rule 11.
Recorded conduct: Defense counsel certified that Eve Legal was used to draft the motion, which attributed a quotation to Seale that did not appear in Seale or any other case. The court ordered counsel to show cause. — outcome: pending; actor: lawyer
Canonical record: Incident tracker entry — verified outcome, regulator disposition and related rules

What the court wrote

Verbatim from the court's document (public domain). Ellipses mark omitted text; nothing is paraphrased.

The undersigned counsel certifies that generative artificial intelligence—specifically, Eve Legal—was used to draft this filing. ... the quoted language to Seale is nevertheless a misrepresentation to the Court—and a troubling one

Court document: govinfo.gov
Public copy first read: damiencharlotin.com
Read: 2026-09-08 · court's own copy read
Found via: charlotin-hallucinations-db
Notes: Read from the copy held by Damien Charlotin's AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0) of the court-authored document. Official copy located 2026-09-08 via govinfo; quoted passage confirmed in the official document. Re-coded from the document 2026-09-08 (independent second read).

United States court documents are public domain; the topic coding, disposition line and summary are SafeLegalAI's reading of the document for comparison, not a finding about any person named in it. This record summarises a public court document or official publication and reports what it says; SafeLegalAI makes no findings of its own. Individuals and organisations are named only as they appear in that public record. Anyone named may send a right of reply, correction or contextual update (for example an appeal, vacatur or later disposition) via /report; we add a dated note where appropriate. Reply or correct this record.

compiled by the SafeLegalAI editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-08v0.2.2coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub